Search

ABSTRACT Introduction: Several differences in the P300 component are observed when responses must be executed or inhibited in the Go/Nogo task. However, few studies were established by using well-controlled task with respect to the preparatory processing and stimulus probability. In the present study, we examined the peak amplitude and latency of Go-P300 (P300 evoked by visual Go stimuli) and Nogo-P300 (P300 evoked by visual Nogo stimuli) component in healthy children. Methods: High resolution EEG data were recorded from 13 children (7-11 years old) during a cued equiprobable Go/Nogo task. The P300 component was measured at frontal (F3, Fz, F4) and parietal (P3, Pz, P4) regions in response to both Go and Nogo stimuli. Data were analyzes using a three-way repeated measures ANOVA.Results: These children displayed higher P300 amplitude in the Go relative to Nogo condition at parietal region. In addition, decrease in P300 latency was observed at the frontal in comparison to parietal region.Discussion: The results might suggest that the P300 is related to different processes or arise from different generators in execution and inhibition conditions.

ABSTRACT Introduction: Several differences in the P300 component are observed when responses must be executed or inhibited in the Go/Nogo task. However, few studies were established by using well-controlled task with respect to the preparatory processing and stimulus probability. In the present study, we examined the peak amplitude and latency of Go-P300 (P300 evoked by visual Go stimuli) and Nogo-P300 (P300 evoked by visual Nogo stimuli) component in healthy children. Methods: High resolution EEG data were recorded from 13 children (7-11 years old) during a cued equiprobable Go/Nogo task. The P300 component was measured at frontal (F3, Fz, F4) and parietal (P3, Pz, P4) regions in response to both Go and Nogo stimuli. Data were analyzes using a three-way repeated measures ANOVA.Results: These children displayed higher P300 amplitude in the Go relative to Nogo condition at parietal region. In addition, decrease in P300 latency was observed at the frontal in comparison to parietal region.Discussion: The results might suggest that the P300 is related to different processes or arise from different generators in execution and inhibition conditions.